As public officials who serve at the mercy of voters, the seven justices of the Illinois Supreme Court are creatures of a political system: They collect millions of dollars in campaign contributions to win elections, then spend their careers striving to assure the rest of us that the money, and the donors, don't influence the court's decisions. That can't be fun.

But there is one opportunity for the justices to be blessedly free of partisan politics: when they fill unexpectedly vacant judgeships. The justices can scour Illinois for the very best, the very brightest, and elevate those men and women into a judiciary that includes too many mopes. The justices can appoint as judges the great legal minds that have no clout whatsoever with this state's Republican or Democratic pols.

But that isn't what the justices do. As the lead story in last Sunday's Tribune reported, the Supreme Court in the past year kept seven politically connected judges on the Cook County bench. That's not all: These seven judges managed to keep fabulous jobs — many salaries approach $180,000, and the public pensions are huge — after voters rejected them in elections:

One had given more than $20,000 to the Cook County Democratic Party. Two had connections to Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan. Others have ties to powerful Chicago Democrats who decide who gets the party's support to be judge. They weren't the only active Democrats chosen for Circuit Court duty by the high court's three justices from Chicago, all who are Democrats themselves. A Tribune review also found the court reappointed three judges who dropped out of judicial races, making room for the Democratic Party's favored candidate. ...

How the Supreme Court decides whom to appoint remains a mystery. Those chosen often have a common qualification on their resumes — ties to powerful Democratic politicians. In Cook County, the process typically goes like this: The Supreme Court appoints a lawyer to the bench, the new judge later runs for election and loses, and the court then reappoints the losing judge to the bench at the same salary and benefits.

If this unabashed judicial patronage sounds disturbingly familiar, it should: Last year the Tribune reported that, since 2000, the Supreme Court had reappointed 18 judges — many of them politically active Democrats — to Cook County judgeships after, yes, voters had rejected them. Reporters Jeff Coen and Todd Lighty explained that those judges often are repeatedly reappointed and serve for years without having to again face ... Cook County voters.

Perpetuating this patronage unjustly deprives citizens of the most diverse, most talented judiciary.

Not because the justices don't have the legal authority to appease Democratic bosses by appointing Democrats: The Illinois Constitution allows the justices, as overseers of the state's court system, to fill vacant judgeships as they choose.

Not because the politically active Democrats they appoint are unqualified: Most have been rated as qualified by bar groups.

No, this patronage is unjust for the reasons that federal judges in Chicago have cited in political corruption cases:

When those who do the hiring or appointing let political activism influence who gets the taxpayer-funded job, they cheat talented candidates who have different connections — or no political clout at all. What's more, taxpayers have no reason to think they're paying for the services of the most qualified candidates. What those taxpayers know, instead, is that they're paying salaries and pensions to cronies chosen from a small pool — in this case, a pool of clouted Democrats.

The public resentment and disdain that political patronage breeds long ago made laughingstocks of Chicago's City Hall, the Cook County Building and, under numerous governors, the Statehouse in Springfield.

Why the Illinois Supreme Court would invite that cynicism and ridicule upon itself is beyond us.

The most logical explanation is that the justices rose in that system and greatly benefited from that system. Burke and Theis were initially appointed to the Supreme Court by the Supreme Court. All three justices from Cook County won election to 10-year terms with Democratic Party backing. Burke and Freeman have been re-elected with party backing.

No, we don't think that judicial appointments made outside of Cook County are free of patronage. Far from it.

Moreover, the rest of the justices dutifully approve each member's recommended candidates. It's a cozy club.

So who's going to break up the club, in the interest of putting qualifications before clout?